tv [untitled] February 29, 2012 6:30pm-7:00pm PST
supervisor avalos: i feel that since they have to come back, we can approve this for the shoreside power aspect of this appropriation ordinance then, so i would like to severna park or delete that part of the appropriation for the $2 million related to shoreside power, and then a motion to approve that for the full board. chair chu: thank you, supervisor avalos, i agree. i would be happy if you had another funding source to bring it before the committee and make
sure that its third in a timely way, but it does not seem like there would be a problem to have been severed out, so i would agree with that motion, so the motion is to sever out the uses and the sources worth $2 million, and so i would ask the department work with our city attorney to make sure we have that reflected in the record. we do have a tight timeline in terms of making sure this item gets to the full board, so if you can, make sure that document, red line versions are available by the end of the day, that we cannot make sure that it is therefore this coming tuesday. so we have a motion to sever out the $2 million and then a motion to send it out to the full board, and i think we can do that without objection. thank you. item number two. clerk young: item number two,
appropriating over $962,000 of the fund balance for fiscal year 2011-2012 for the design of the jefferson street streetscape improvements, and placing $52,600 on controllers reserve pending receipt of the interest earnings. chair chu: thank you for that. we have a number of people here, but before we go to that, i want to welcome our president been chiu. would you like to make a comment? president chiu: fisherman's wharf is a destination. and about 10 million tourists go through. this is in the heart of the wharf. as you know, it is not a good
street level experience. it is poorly designed for people looking for parking, extremely difficult for cyclists and for muni. for many years, there have been discussions about how to build the streetscape. in fact, this project dates back to 2006, which is when this has happened. there is no consensus that will be presented today, and this is important not just for the neighborhood and for my district but for the entire city, and the budget analyst's report in addition to my strong support, mayor lee also wants to make sure that this project gets done for the eight america's cup. i hope that he will support this. chair chu: thank you. >> i want to start by saying that the supplemental appropriation requests before you is the design for a two- block segment of jefferson street.
we are here requesting design funds so we can get started right away on design so we can get construction under way by this fall. we are going to be on a very tight timeline in order to complete the project by june 2013. and that is in time for the first america's cup event next summer. before i get into details about what the total project costs are going to be and what our timeline is, we thought it was important to give context to the project, and a representative from the planning department is here to talk about the plans and what the community is after and also the benefits that are going to come to the city from this, so i'm going to have neal speak
first. >> hello. i was the lead planner. just some background, our involvement began in 2008, when, as the supervisor indicated, we have plans going back to 1961 calling for improvements to jefferson street. this is an area that has received a lot of attention. the recent started in 2008 at the request of supervisor peskin. we soon hired some architects out of copenhagen, denmark, who really gave us context. we counted every human being, and during the summer months, and we found some very surprising numbers. jefferson peaks at about 65,000 pedestrians per day.
that is a huge number. we have done similar numbers the rock the city, and on the market street and one pier have more. it is very crowded. there is a high level of pedestrians. there is a safety issue and enjoy ability issue that extends not just for pedestrians but four cyclists. this is the largest gap in the bay trail remaining. in this area alone, there are about one-quarter of 1 million bicycles rented every year, and there is an important connection between downtown and the connections to the west. and the circulation is really geared to the automobile. most of the street is given over to the automobile even though by far the largest user is the pedestrian. this turns this relationship on its head and does more for the pedestrian while accommodating the automobile where and when
necessary, so the goal that we worked with with the key stakeholders is to retreat a beautiful, lively, memorable st. that strengthens fisherman's wharf, some predicate in on that is prioritizing human comfort at a speed and a scale that is scaled towards the human body and the human movement, and that includes pedestrians and bicycles, and so the garden design that we have developed, we take on street parking. we have 16 but sidewalks from the south, and the pedestrian zone on the north to take advantage of the light, and that includes a 16 foot sidewalk and a mixed cafés 9.
there is the experience as you walk down jefferson street. but chair chu: do you have slides. >> no, we do not. chair chu: in the future, if you were able to distribute these in advance, that would be helpful, because we cannot see the screen. >> thank you. this is the first two blocks. jones and high street. it would allow us to have some traffic diversions strategies, so the key part of the plan is really to reduce this to the greatest extent possible, so that it is a call, say, and enjoyable experience. again, some background, in fiscal year 2010, the area received about 9 million visitors and generated through
various rents and taxes about $65 million revenue towards the city, said just doing a very basic sensitivity analysis, what would happen with a 5%, 10% or more increase based other cities across, going to new york and denver and portland in between, and you can see just even a modest increase results in a long-term benefit to the city on an annual basis. and with that, i am going to hand the microphone over for douglas for the budget. thank you. >> hi. the lack of the handouts is my fault, not his. i apologize. so the concept plan that came out of the planning effort
proposed a very beautiful project that for these two blocs would total about $8.70 million. before we went to the capital planning committee, the mayor's office asked that we look at other alternatives that could be considered, it said these range for about $5 million of the way up. we need to make a decision fairly soon and about which option we are going to be implementing. the main difference and the costs is using much less expensive materials. option one involves a lot of granite in the street. it is a very striking design, and i think it is appropriate for jefferson street, which is
such of an iconic street for fisherman's wharf. it is, however, very expensive treatment, so we can do a lot of the same street scape treatments, two-way traffic calming eliminating the parking lane, providing for safe bicycle traffic, also widened in the sidewalks and making more room for pedestrians out of the street, so we are looking at these three options, and we will be coming back to you probably at the time that we present the budget in order to ask for an appropriation to pay for construction, so as i said, we are going to start design immediately. we will be holding stakeholder meetings to discuss those options. we hope to have the design done by june and immediately gets bid
documents out so we are able to start construction in october, and one of the things that neal did not mention, and president chiu might want to mention, we would have to do this during the moratorium. usually during the holiday, we suspend construction. the merchants in the fisherman's wharf area are so anxious to have this project implemented that we're going to be working right through that moratorium with their understanding and cooperation because they are concerned about our meeting that schedule. that is it for this light. the budget analyst noted that the supplemental appropriation request was for $962,000, but the money that we need for design on the totals a little north of $700,000, and they have
recommended that the remainder be put on budget committee reserve. that makes sense to us, and we would come and ask for that reserve to be lifted when we come back to you to request construction funding. so that concludes our presentation, and we are available for any questions. chair chu: thank you. i think there will be some questions. these are the fund balances from the proper -- prop b? >> it is all interest earnings on a state proposition 1b bonds, said these are the state's infrastructure bonds that were passed to think in 2006, and the city received about $40 million in proceeds that were appropriated and paid for street
resurfacing projects over the past few years. those first increments of revenue came to the city when interest rates were still high, so all of this is interest earnings on those funds. >> -- chair chu: that if it was not for this, what with the interest earnings be spent on? >> they can be used for what used to be called proposition 42 money. it is now gas tax money. they can be used for any capital improvements in the right of way. chair chu: so there is a fairly broad area that we can spend on? ok. why do we not go to the supervisor? supervisor kim: given the price for art but cost of phase one,
which is rather high, if we go to a cheaper alternative, is it less long term in terms of the improvements? does that mean that we may have to make improvements sooner? >> i do not believe -- you know, we may have to do in a few years away relatively inexpensive -- inexpensive miller and fill procedure if we go with an asphalt to design, but the street itself will have the same useful life, and it is possible that we would do other treatments and balding pate or that kind of -- involving paint or that kind of thing, but they would need to be done. supervisor kim: i saw the public row, the largest one, and then i
saw a arcades and entertainment. i am wondering what that was. >> i am going to let neal speaks does agree to that. >> right now, what we are proposing is for reducing the right of way that is dedicated to the automobile, basically taking away the parking lanes and allocating it to the north side of the street, so what we get on the north side of the street now instead of a 3 ft. to 7-foot sidewalk, sometimes absent in some places, we would have a new 16-foot sidewalk, and depending on the land use, a cafe with outdoor seating, as there is today. it would be more of a public plaza with seating and an entrance to the retail store. supervisor kim: is this something that the residents there could do immediately? >> they would receive revenues
from the space, so we would encourage the and design that into the project. supervisor kim: and i am not sure who this is a question to, but the remaining costs and the remaining funds, where do we imagine that we will be pulling these funds from from the budget analyst's report, it said general funds, but i am curious about what some of our thinking was around where we think the sources of funding will come from? >> deputy budget director with the mayor's office. thanks for asking that question. currently, there is a request into the capital planning committee to fund the project, and there is a general fund cost, although it would still come back to the committee for review in the future. the mayor's office is definitely committed to making this project happen, but we are absolutely
interested in reducing the cost impact to the general fund, and part of that is in the design phase, trying to find ways to deliver the project without taking on any costs that are not absolutely needed. we are working hard to identify other possible funding sources. one possible source could be that the area has an allocation which is designed for each district, and using their criteria, it it could be that they have some contribution from that source. additionally, we will be looking hard at whether there are grants which could be used to fund this, whether they are state or regional, or whether they are related to waterfront-related use, for example, so this is something that we have to be working hard to identify through the budget process, but i think the importance of having the design phase begin as soon as possible is why we are coming to you today and not having this as
a combined package. supervisor kim: thank you. and terms of follow up, using granite for the streets and sidewalks, i think that is something that is not a good use of our funding. it does not extend the useful life. we get plenty of other needs in the city. i cannot possibly imagine the granite sidewalks or street resurfacing. i know that is something that the department will look at when it does come before us if it does come before us, but i do not even know why we proposed that to the capital planning committee. it seems we should have at least had the initial betting, where we might have $8.70 million that was put out in terms of the report, but we would not approach the city government to say that we will fund a project that proposes granite street and granite sidewalks. that is not reflective of where we are with our budget at this
time. and second, in regard to the funding source, for many of the big improvements that we have had in the city, it seems that we have been able to leverage many other funds to accomplish them, so in addition to general funds, perhaps we are able to receive other funding, whether it is federal or not to create better spaces for the city. in this situation, we are really not looking for that, not of the looking or that. given the time that we're looking at, realistically what is going to be the possibility to pay for and leverage these improvements? >> i will address the first concern first. supervisor chu: that was just a statement. i hope that that comes out, at the least. >> the reason we have options on the table in terms of cost, i believe that second and third options do not include granite streets. supervisor chu: the second one
does include granite treatment. option three does not. >> there are components. but those are still preliminary. part of having this is to clarify what our options are. it may be that we do not choose any of these. at capital planning committee some have brought up that it is more important to have additional sidewalk space rather than the materials. those could be customized throughout the process. in terms of the desire to identify other funding sources, you are correct, we are on a tight timeline. this project is the first phase of a longer-term project. this is identified in the better streets plan as a special st.
plan that has economic benefit and is something that visitors to the city see and something that we hope residents will utilize more fully. i think that we are able to identify possible grant funds or other funding sources that we are able to scrape up to pay for the project. if not, we will continue to work for those -- look for those in future work. to clarify, the $8 million is only phase one. we are not talking about phase two, correct? >> correct. it does not include the blocks involved. these were selected because of the minimal impact on the tracks that currently run through the area. these are places that saw the possibility of making the changes that we wanted to see happen on the street delivered in time for the america's cup. if this was an improvement we were committed to seeing come
through, on a timeframe that would have additional benefits where there is a better viewing area for people, in the america's cup, where there is a possibility of fulfilling plot from the commitment -- fulfilling the commitment from them, with a safer location or visitors to the city. supervisor chu: supervisor avalos? supervisor avalos: but we have identified for construction is significant. related to the america's cup, has this been accounted for? is this part of the hidden costs that are part of the america's cup that come before us? that we will be looking at proving are not somehow being accounted for? i see senator campbell standing up. you did a lot of analysis on the sources. >> costs for this project were
not included in previous estimates. supervisor chu: -- supervisor avalos: i say that because i know there is a great deal of work being done by the city to prepare for the america's cup and i see the value of that in terms of making sure that we get the site ready for all of the visitors hopefully coming. i look at parts of san francisco that have tremendous needs around pedestrian and bicycle safety that do not get this attention. that is something that i see on a daily basis in major thoroughfares in district 11. but there are many places around the city that have the same issues. sunset, the richmond, the bayview, the valley. i do not see where we get the same kind of treatment when it comes to a capital plan in terms of how we will move forward with making these improvements. when it comes to a capital plan,
there are some things that sound like a new aspect of the capital plan. it sounds like a lot of deferment going on. what are the things that will not get done because we are putting these investments here? that is a rhetorical question. there are a lot of things that will not get done. i feel like it is something that i feel compelled to say. that this is something that people in parts of san francisco who are far from fisherman's wharf, who see the trickle-down benefits of the activity in san francisco, they do not necessarily see the investment in the place is needed in parts of san francisco. there are all sorts of folks who are part of this discussion in that it is important that we recognize, as a city, that we are not looking equitably and how we deal with pedestrian safety issues in san francisco. even when it comes to our streets, we can make an equal
amount per district in terms of what we will receive for benefits, but even that is not equitable. there are a lot of places that do not get the types of attention that we get in other places in san francisco. >> i definitely wanted to address the america's cup report. it shows the emphasis that i've brought up. in terms of the america's cup, it is more the time line that has been impacted. doing this now as opposed to the budget process and matching that timeline. this process has been in the work -- in the works before the america's cup was thought of as an option for san francisco. there have been excessive planning processes and a lot of work to rally the community together around this. we have viewed this as an opportunity to deliver the benefit and that sort of leverage that with the additional benefits that come
with the america's cup. i do agree that this is an area that has incredibly high pedestrian counts, completing the bay trail, making a save in both directions is a benefit that will extend far beyond the immediate neighborhood here. as with different -- as a san francisco neighborhood -- resident, i would hope that it would be some place i would choose to go more frequently. supervisor chu: i really want to thank supervisor avalos for bringing that up. it has long been a frustration that i have expressed myself. had it not been for the america's cup, perhaps you would not have this sort of short and the timeline, though it is sort of our own imposed deadline.
there is no other reason, other than to make it more safe, knowing that there will be a large number of spectators individuals who will be there. but this is really -- how would you szeged? the opportunity of the america's cup -- how would you say it? the opportunity of the america's cup has allowed this project to leapfrog other worthy projects. that statement needs to be made. it is not lost on any of us, given that many neighborhoods do not receive the same attention, given that we are not in dense areas. i think that that is something that is important to acknowledge. in terms of the process, i think that it adds the message of what is an equitable project and allocation to focus on across the city. without a cb b two convene the process and report to say what a vision my book like, will that report -- create a commission --
a position where we do not have the opportunity to move things forward more expediently? that is a big question in a big concern of mine. i just what to say that. even though i may see that there is a benefit in terms of this pedestrian safety component, i do not think that we are the thing at this equitably across the city. supervisor chiu? supervisor chiu: colleagues, i want to let you know that i am absolutely committed to figuring out equitable commitments around the city regarding streetscape issues. can you pull up a multipliers on the revenues that we anticipate what we do this? supervisor kim: and is it possible to have someone e-mail possible to have someone e-mail this to us, so that we can look